A Couple of Real Gems from the "Harvey and Lee" Website

[W. Tracy Parnell]

10 hours ago, James Norwood said:

Tracy,

You are not responding to my question.  In fact, you are dodging the question. 

 

You seem to be familiar with Jeremy's website and book to the degree that you have taken the time to write an apology for him on this thread. 

So, what are the "uncontested facts" about Oswald from the Warren Report adduced by Jeremy?  I'm not asking for Jeremy's position on "all" of the issues related to the JFK assassination, only those on Oswald.

And also, what do you believe are the uncontested facts, if any, about Oswald?

 

I never intended to respond to your question. I have Jeremy's book and although I only skimmed through it, my impression was that he leans toward a conspiracy while discounting some of the outlandish theories such as H&L. As far as what I believe, this thread is about the H&L theory not me.

Edited August 30, 2017 by W. Tracy Parnell

[W. Tracy Parnell]

7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Just to be clear, I don't do that and I've never seen anybody else do that.

I thought that Jeremy was a lone nutter because some of the things he writes are consistent with his being one. Like when he wrote, "The basic, uncontested facts of the JFK assassination can be found in the Warren Report." He really should qualify that statement to make it clear that the alleged "facts" presented in the WR aren't all uncontested. In fact, as far as I can tell, the majority are contested.

 

No, I was referring to Mr. Norwood who is getting off to a bad start here by applying the tactic of painting everyone who isn't onboard with the discredited H&L theory as a "lone nutter."

[W. Tracy Parnell]

8 hours ago, James Norwood said:

Marita Lorenz may be the most important individual still living who has the potential to set the record straight about Harvey and Lee.

Wrong. But I can tell you one important individual who can set the record straight about H&L. His name is Vincent DiMaio. From his book, Morgue: A Life in Death:

As we examined the skull, the small hole in the left mastoid process leapt out. Its man-made edges were rounded and smooth, healed but not natural. It was an old lesion that couldn’t be faked. Our dead man and Lee Harvey Oswald had both undergone a mastoidectomy in the distant past.

DiMaio, Dr. Vincent; Franscell, Ron. Morgue: A Life in Death (p. 118). St. Martin's Press. Kindle Edition.

 

So, "Harvey" had an operation that "Lee" was supposed to have had and the theory as it currently exists is disproved as was the Eddowes theory that the exhumation was undertaken to verify. Jim Hargrove has lately offered the explanation that "Harvey" had a mastoidectomy when he was at Jacobi Hospital for mental tests per Louise Robertson. Aside from the fact there is no other evidence of this, Robertson's statement is suspect since Jacobi was not in existence at the time she allegedly heard Marguerite make this statement.

 

H&L supporters will no doubt try and paint DiMaio as some sort of government shill. But none of the people who were in attendance at the exhumation reported anything amiss and the photographs taken that day support the finding of DiMaio and his colleagues. It was only later that Paul Groody, the man that embalmed LHO, raised concerns about the exhumation. Groody was apparently well-meaning but just mistaken:

 

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/paul-groody.html

 

Of course, the HSCA handwriting and photo evidence are also powerful scientific based proof refuting the H&L theory. To sum up, Armstrong needs to write a new book and rework the theory or stop promoting it.

 

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/the-truth-about-harvey-lee.html

[James Norwood]

To:  Jeremy Bojczuk, Experienced Member

In response to your post about me above, I have reported your comments to the administration.  The goal of these threads is intended as debate of the issues of the JFK assassination, not personal attacks on fellow members.  The forum rules are very specific about casting aspersions on other forum members.  Here is the wording in the agreement we signed:

"Any current member who casts aspersions about the Forum and/or its membership – either from within the forum or outside the forum - may loose [sic] their posting privileges or indeed be banned." 

In my post that prompted your intemperate response, I was only asking for you to defend your position about the Warren Report providing "basic, uncontested facts of the JFK assassination."  The main thesis of the Warren Report is that Oswald shot the president and acted alone in doing so.  Given the paramount importance of that conclusion, what are the "basic, uncontested facts" about Oswald presented in the Warren Report?  Or are there none?

[James Norwood]

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Wrong. But I can tell you one important individual who can set the record straight about H&L. His name is Vincent DiMaio. From his book, Morgue: A Life in Death:

 

Tracy,

In my post to which you refer above, I was presenting new information on Marita Lorenz to the forum participants.

In response, you type the word "Wrong," then move on to unrelated issues in order to deflect the conversation away from Lorenz.

Your post above is an example of the kind of misdirection used more skillfully for years by John McAdams in a fruitless attempt to defend the findings of Warren Commission. 

[Jim Hargrove]

Anyone who thinks CIA officials would be unwilling to perform an unnecessary mastoidectomy on a young boy just to meet the goals of the Oswald Project should take a look at the CIA's MKULTRA program, in which hundreds and probably thousands of unsuspecting Americans from every walk of life were poisoned with LSD.  Some of the decision-makers in the CIA during the 1950s and 1960s were clearly criminally insane.

[Jim Hargrove]

Since Mr. Norwood has decided to drop by the JFK Assassination Debate forum, I thought some readers might be interested in taking a look at his fascinating article on the Harvey and Lee Website.  Just follow this link:

http://harveyandlee.net/J_Norwood/Legend.html

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, James Norwood said:

Tracy,

In my post to which you refer above, I was presenting new information on Marita Lorenz to the forum participants.

In response, you type the word "Wrong," then move on to unrelated issues in order to deflect the conversation away from Lorenz.

Your post above is an example of the kind of misdirection used more skillfully for years by John McAdams in a fruitless attempt to defend the findings of Warren Commission. 

Most people don't take Lorenz seriously at this point. Here are a couple resources for those interested including an excerpt from Gaeton Fonzi's book discussing Lorenz and her story:

http://www.jfk-online.com/lorenz.html

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/denial.htm#marita

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Anyone who thinks CIA officials would be unwilling to perform an unnecessary mastoidectomy on a young boy just to meet the goals of the Oswald Project should take a look at the CIA's MKULTRA program, in which hundreds and probably thousands of unsuspecting Americans from every walk of life were poisoned with LSD.  Some of the decision-makers in the CIA during the 1950s and 1960s were clearly criminally insane.

But Armstrong never said this in his book. He offered no explanation for the exhumation at all and he simply ignored the fact that it rendered his theory moot.

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Anyone who thinks CIA officials would be unwilling to perform an unnecessary mastoidectomy on a young boy just to meet the goals of the Oswald Project should take a look at the CIA's MKULTRA program, in which hundreds and probably thousands of unsuspecting Americans from every walk of life were poisoned with LSD.  Some of the decision-makers in the CIA during the 1950s and 1960s were clearly criminally insane.

But Armstrong never said this in his book. He offered no explanation for the exhumation at all and he simply ignored the fact that it rendered his theory moot.

Armstrong indeed should have noted that the mastoidectomy detected on HARVEY's exhumed body was evidence against the Harvey & Lee theory. (He does report all the information necessary for readers to make that determination on their own, but it is something that can easily escape their attention.)

However the preponderance of evidence is in opposition to the mastoidectomy outlier. So I'm inclined to believe there is something missing or wrong with the mastoidectomy evidence. It seems to me there are only two possibilities to explain it. Either efforts were made to keep identifiable medical marks, such as the mastoidectomy and dental work, identical between the two Oswalds, or a fake mastoidectomy scar was added to the exhumation report and the witnesses were convinced to go along with it, probably with some bullxxxx "national security" story fed to them.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

9 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

There is a perfectly credible explanation for the apparent inconsistency in Oswald's school records, an explanation which Sandy (and Jim, of course) has so far failed to discuss, presumably because it doesn't require him to believe in a hugely implausible multi-year conspiracy. It can be found here:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1500-one-more-attempt-at-those-darn-school-records

If you are so sure of that Jeremy, then why don't you explain it to us? $1000 says you have no idea how Greg Parker supposedly debunked the "Oswald attending two schools simultaneously" evidence.

Put up or shut up Jeremy. *

I've read it and I don't explain it because it makes no sense.

 

 

(*Note that I say that with no malice... it's merely a pithy American expression.)

put up or shut up

phrase of put

1.  

   informal

   justify oneself or remain silent.

   "they called for the alderman to either put up or shut up"

    

Edited August 30, 2017 by Sandy Larsen

[David Josephs]

Geez... how many times?

Tell us how the FBI and the school district arrives at 200 days of school between the dates offered...  Parker tried and failed miserably.

Oswald did not attend summer school, DID go to Youth House and would have the same holidays applied to him as everyone else...

Jeremy - find us 200 school days between 3/23/53 and 1/12/54...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 26, 2019 by David Josephs

[W. Tracy Parnell]

46 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Armstrong indeed should have noted that the mastoidectomy detected on HARVEY's exhumed body was evidence against the Harvey & Lee theory. (He does report all the information necessary for readers to make that determination on their own, but it is something that can easily escape their attention.)

However the preponderance of evidence is in opposition to the mastoidectomy outlier. So I'm inclined to believe there is something missing or wrong with the mastoidectomy evidence. It seems to me there are only two possibilities to explain it. Either efforts were made to keep identifiable medical marks, such as the mastoidectomy and dental work, identical between the two Oswalds, or a fake mastoidectomy scar was added to the exhumation report and the witnesses were convinced to go along with it, probably with some bullxxxx "national security" story fed to them.

 

Actually, you will have to stay with the first mastoidectomy scenario because there is nothing wrong with the exhumation. Believe me Sandy, I looked at that carefully in late nineties and there is nothing there. The witnesses could not have been convinced to keep quiet since Paul Groody did indeed come forward to voice his opinions repeatedly. And Groody never mentioned the government convincing witnesses not to talk-he only stated his pet theories based on his own faulty memory. So you are stuck with Jim's theory that "Harvey" was given a mastoid operation in New York. I think if you took a closer look at the exhumation evidence Sandy, it might convince you that H&L is wrong. By the way, the exhumation evidence is not an "outlier." You have the handwriting and photographic evidence done by the HSCA. You have the statements of LHO's family and those closest to him, none of whom thought there were two of him. You have the behavior of the "fake" Marguerite (documented at my website). You have the fact that nobody that knew Marguerite came forward to say the woman they knew was not the woman they saw on TV and in publications. So a lot of evidence against H&L.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Parker stated that the school records were being misread. Supporters of H&L choose not to believe that. BTW, David Josephs continues to use his photo of LHO at the zoo to try and demonstrate that "Harvey" was short while "Lee" was taller. But using Josephs' own numbers for the height of the railing shows that "Harvey" was 5' 4"- just as he was measured.

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-bronx-zoo-photo.html

[David Josephs]

Tracy - show us 200 school days excluding the summer that a child could attend between the dates offered.

Neither you, nor anyone else can do it so you try to pick on something more subjective.  

Maybe also explain how a 5'4" 115 lb boy loses both height and weight as he goes thru puberty...  the zoo photo is well over a year after the entrance docs designate him the big boy Lee was and is remembered as... leader, fighter....

Stick with FACTS please Tracy...  the # of days in the year or between certain dates is not subjective...  simply count and explain the difference

We'll wait and see if you can stay on a single topic and offer a reasonable answer for the 200 out of 210 day riddle.